Summary
The methods section of a research paper provides the information by which a study’s validity is judged.Therefore, it requires a clear and precise description of how an experiment was done, and the rationale for why specific experimental procedures were chosen. The methods section should describe what was done to answer the research question, describe how it was done, justify the experimental design, and explain how the results were analyzed. Scientific writing is direct and orderly. Therefore, the methods section structure should: describe the materials used in the study, explain how the materials were prepared for the study, describe the research protocol, explain how measurements were made and what calculations were performed, and state which statistical tests were done to analyze the data. Once all elements of the methods section are written, subsequent drafts should focus on how to present those elements as clearly and logically as possibly. The description of preparations, measurements, and the protocol should be organized chronologically. For clarity, when a large amount of detail must be presented, information should be presented in sub-sections according to topic. Material in each section should be organized by topic from most to least important. Introduction The methods section is the
most important aspect of a research paper because it provides the information
by which the validity of a study is ultimately judged. Therefore, the author
must provide a clear and precise description of how an experiment was done,
and the rationale for the specific
(1) the experiment could be repeated by others to evaluate whether the results are reproducible, and (2) the audience can judge
whether the results and conclusions are valid.
Basic Research Concepts The scientific method attempts
to discover cause-and effect relationships between objects (ie, physical
matter or processes). In the physical sciences objects are regarded as
variables, and a variable is anything that can assume different values.
Elucidating a cause-and-effect relationship
Evaluation of a potential
cause-effect relationship between 2 objects is accomplished through the
development of the study design. A study design is simply a strategy to
control and manipulate variables that provide an answer to the research
question regarding potential cause-and-effect
Validity refers to the credibility
of experimental results and the degree to which the results can be applied
to the general population of interest. Internal validity refers to the
credibility of a study and is determined by the degree to which conclusions
drawn from an experiment correctly describe what actually transpired during
the study.1 External
validity refers to whether (and to what degree) the results of a study
can be generalized to a larger population. 1
Unfortunately, all biological systems are profoundly
complex, so simple, unambiguous, direct relationships between objects can
be difficult to ascertain. The internal validity of a study is judged by
the degree to which its outcomes can be attributed to manipulation of independent
variables and not to the effects of confounding variables. Therefore, the
study protocol must be designed to control (eg, to keep constant) as many
extraneous factors as possible so that any potential cause-and-effect relationship
between 2 objects can be judged accurately. It is importantto emphasize
that confounding variables can never be fully controlled. Furthermore,
the influence of these variables may not be fully appreciated by those
conducting the research. External validity is primarily determined by how
subjects are selected to participate in a study and by the use of randomization
procedures that limit potential bias in how subjects are assigned to treatment
groups.
Content and Writing Style of the Methods Section Historically, the methods
section was referred to as the “materials and methods” to emphasize the
2 distinct areas that must be addressed. “Materials” referred to what was
examined (eg, humans, animals, tissue preparations) and also to the various
treatments (eg, drugs, gases) and instruments
The complexity of scientific inquiry necessitates that the writing of the methods be clear and orderly to avoid confusion and ambiguity. First, it is usually helpful to structure the methods section by: 1. Describing the materials used in the study 2. Explaining how the materials were prepared 3. Describing the research protocol 4. Explaining how measurements were made and what calculations were performed 5. Stating which statistical tests were done to analyze the data2 Second, the writing
should be direct and precise and in the past tense. Compound sentence structures
should be avoided, as well as descriptions of unimportant details. Once
all elements of the methods section are written down during the initial
draft, subsequent drafts should focus on
Subjects Judging the external validity of a study involving human subjects (ie, to whom the study results may be applied) requires that descriptive data be provided regarding the basic demographic profile of the sample population, including age, gender, and possibly the racial composition of the sample. When animals are the subjects of a study, it is important to list species, weight, strain, sex, and age. Who is chosen for inclusion
in a study (as well as how treatments are assigned) in large measure determines
what limits are placed on the generalizations that can be made regarding
the study results. Thus, when writing the methods section, it is important
to describe who the subjects were in the context of the research question.
The selection criteria and rationale for enrolling patients into the study
must be stated explicitly. For example, if the study proclaims to examine
whether latanoprost reduces post-phacoemulsification intraocular pressure,
then one would not anticipate that patients with combined trabeculectomy
and phacoemulsifcation to be included. In addition, it is important when
describing patients to provide some evaluation of their health status that
is relevant to the study.
Ethical Considerations When working with human or
animal subjects, there must be a declaration that the medical center’s
institutional review board governing research on living matter has determined
that the study protocol adheres to ethical principles. Without such approval,
no research project can be conducted nor can it be published in a reputable,
peerreview science journal.
Preparations In studies involving animal models or mechanical models, a detailed description must be provided regarding the preparations made prior to beginning the experimental protocol. In studies involving animals a detailed description should be provided on the use of sedation and anesthesia, the route of administration, and how its efficacy was evaluated.2 In addition, all aspects of animal or tissue preparation required prior to initiation of the research protocol must be described in detail. With any animal preparation or mechanical model there must be enough detail provided so that the reader can duplicate it or evaluate its relevance. When a study involves the use or evaluation of drugs, the generic drug name should be used and the manufacturer, concentration, dose, and infusion rate should be specified. Likewise, when medical gases are used, the concentration and flow rates should be specified. It is worth noting that the
introduction of any novel method for measuring a variable, or preparing
/designing a model will require intense discussion. Depending on how unique
(or unorthodox) the new method is, its validation probably should be established
in a separate publication, published prior to submission of the main study.
Protocol Design The research protocol is
the sequence of manipulations and measurement procedures that make up the
experiment. Its description should follow the exact sequence of how the
procedures were executed.2
Typically, this first involves a description of baseline conditions and
any associated
When writing the methods
section, it is important to bear in mind that the rationale or assumptions
on which some procedures are based may not always be obvious to the audience.
This is particularly true when writing for a general medical audience,
as opposed to members of a subspecialty. Therefore, the writer must always
keep in mind who his/her audience is. The rationale and assumptions on
which experimental procedures are based should be briefly stated in the
methods section and, if necessary, described in more detail in the discussion
section. Whenever it is not obvious, the purpose of a procedure should
be stated in relationship either to the research question or to the entire
protocol. Writing the methods section in this style is called a purpose-procedure
format.2
Measurements and Calculations The next step in the methods
section is to describe what variables were measured and how those measurements
were made. The description of measurement instruments should include the
manufacturer and model, calibration procedures, and how measurements were
made. It also may be necessary to justify why and how certain variables
were measured. This becomes particularly important when the object of the
experiment can be approached only indirectly. Tangentially, whenever a
value for a variable is used to signify a state or condition, this should
be stated explicitly. For example, one could state: “Adequate intraocular
pressure control was indicated by a pressure of < 21 mm Hg.” A
listing of all calculations used in the study typically follows the description
of measurements.
Data Analysis The last step in the methods
section is to describe how the data will be presented in the results section
(eg, mean vs median), which statistical tests will used for the infer-ential
data, and what p value is deemed to indicate a statistically significant
difference.
Summary The methods section is the
most important part of a research paper because it provides the information
the reader needs to judge the study’s validity. Providing a clear and precise
description of how an experiment was done, and the rationale for specific
experimental procedures are crucial aspects of scientific writing.
REFERENCES 1. Hulley SB, Newman TB,
Cummings SR. The anatomy and physiology of research.
2. Zeiger M. Essentials of
writing biomedical research papers. New York: McGraw-Hill;
|
|
|